@kevmack wrote:Notably the mother is now trying to say that she was accused of throwing the baby from the 8th floor into the swimming pool, even though their room looked over the carpark, not the pool and is therefore twisting the sequence of events to make it look totally unlikely and to try and get people to believe her account.

Of course she completely airbrushes the being drunk with the baby on the veranda, and just morphs that into this crazy notion that she would throw her child into the pool from the 8th floor.

I totally believe the sequence of events as initially reported, that at some point she threw the baby into the pool (obviously from poolside, not the veranda) then later was staggering around drunk, with her baby on the 8th floor veranda

If, in the unlikely event I had ever taken leave of my senses, and had got drunk on holiday with my baby daughter and ended up in their situation, I would have crawled away, so embarrassed and very relieved that no further action was taken, and never been seen or heard of again, but yet again, we have these idiots now also trying to jump on the Madeleine bandwagon to justify their own rubbish parenting skills. I just cannot understand some people, I really, really can't

Then again it's doing the Mccanns no favours if these people are using their story to jump on the bandwagon, all the more reason for SY to stop it.

One of my friends put this on their status on FB last night, and no one believed it. How times change!

Months after the country was assailed by photos of Baby Daniel - the angel-faced infant who went missing on the island of Madeira for three long cold nights in January - news now emerges that his mother Lídia was behind the staged abduction, and was in fact trying to sell the little boy for €50,000.Dogged PJ police are still trying to piece all the intrigue together. According to news services, they remain unsure who the intermediary was in the deal, and to whom Daniel was destined.But the whole hypothesis of abduction has well and truly been thrown out the window.Daniel’s mother Lídia is now in police custody and her two children, Daniel and Mariana, are back with their father Carlos and his parents in the ramshackle home that the family have in Calheta.According to newspapers, suspicions always hovered over the parents but detectives stuck to a strategy. They even called off the search for the little boy less than 24-hours after he went missing, as they considered this was the best option to ensure his safety.The gamble paid off: Daniel was found safe and well - his nappy changed and his stomach full - very close to the area where he went missing. His parents were apparently elated, and police then sat back and waited to see what would happen next.It didn’t take long. Lídia moved out of the family home, taking the children with her - and began living with another man. Husband Carlos is understood to have already had strong suspicions of her behaviour and at some point over the last week, Lídia lodged a complaint against him for domestic violence.The pair were taken in for questioning, and during that time, police at last got the confession they had been waiting for.Lídia, not Carlos, had been the prime-mover behind the scheme. She told police she needed the money to ‘make a new life’ away from her husband. She also mentioned the heart problems of little Mariana (see Resident’s March 13 edition: http://portugalresident.com/more-heartache-for-family-of-kidnapped-baby-...), but her story remains incomplete. She has still not apparently identified whoever it was who looked after Daniel in the intervening hours as she played the distraught mother - and she has not indicated who wanted to buy her son, who is soon to be two.Lídia is now due in court this morning charged with people trafficking and aggravated kidnap, while Carlos has told newspapers that his former partner will “never see the children again”.For police, it has been another case of the PJ maxim: “Justice works in silence.”

Belfast couple deny being drunk while caring for baby daughterElsewhere, a newspaper in Belfast has carried the apparent ‘flip side’ of the story of the young holidaymaking couple who hit the headlines last month for being drunk in charge of their baby daughter.The couple allege they simply gave their child Calpol for her teething pain, and that this was what caused staff at the Hotel Paraíso in Albufeira to call in police. Both parents deny categorically that they were drunk.Talking to the Belfast Telegraph, the child’s mother Leanne O’Donoghue said Portuguese police told her: “We don’t want another Madeleine McCann” and then accused the parents of drugging and abusing their baby.Now safe home on Irish soil, the pair told the newspaper that social services have “absolutely no concerns” about their daughter’s wellbeing.They also maintained that police stole the last of their holiday money during the ordeal, but no official allegation is understood to have been made.

Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueI'm the mother off the child an the original press report came from portugease an thatsy there was no mention. Because the police took r baby because we gave her calpol!!! They said we drugged her!!! Them when the hospital released a statement saying that my child was not drugged. Off course these horrible police changes there story!! So they therefore told the media that I threw my child in a pool!!! I was so drink I could not care for her!! If this was the case my daughter would be dead!!! One police man even told us this was political policing because off the ongoing maddie mc cann case!! The reason none off it makes sense is because the portugease media an police r using my family to show that they take zero tolerance with holiday makers.. Well they have used the wrong family! Eireann had been given calpol for teething, I never gave her a sedative an I was never arrested!! People need to really read between the lines!!

@sofieellis wrote:The mother has been responding to posts on facebook about the story:

Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueI'm the mother off the child an the original press report came from portugease an thatsy there was no mention. Because the police took r baby because we gave her calpol!!! They said we drugged her!!! Them when the hospital released a statement saying that my child was not drugged. Off course these horrible police changes there story!! So they therefore told the media that I threw my child in a pool!!! I was so drink I could not care for her!! If this was the case my daughter would be dead!!! One police man even told us this was political policing because off the ongoing maddie mc cann case!! The reason none off it makes sense is because the portugease media an police r using my family to show that they take zero tolerance with holiday makers.. Well they have used the wrong family! Eireann had been given calpol for teething, I never gave her a sedative an I was never arrested!! People need to really read between the lines!!

Oh please woman! Why still no clarification on what your husband was doing at the bar and how much he was drinking if you are both totally innocent of doing anything wrong with your child. The constant bleating of 'we did nothing wrong', is just making you look more and more stupid!

Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueThe purpose off the story is because the maddie mccan searches where about to begin an the portugease police jumped at the chance. My child should never off been taken to hospital as she was not drugged an that's y they took her!! The portugease police told me calpol was illegal. Y would they drugg yest her if it wasn't!!

[size=12]Natalie CharlesworthLee-Ann I don't want you to take this the wrong way but if you're trying to move on why the interviews with the papers?

[size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueBecause I thought if I gave the truth they would stop hounding me as we have been hounded for our story from we came home[/size]

[size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueNot money!! My version.. Every paper in portual an Northern Ireland has had there say!!! So I'm not alowd to tell the truth y while family has been slated in the press[/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueI can't see any pool from my eighth floor view if room? Also I can't see where any onlookers would be to apparently see me so drunk!!![/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueThat's because there where no onlookers that's because I never threw my child in a pool!!! That's because it's all lies!! End off!! Believe what uses want[/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueI was never arrested!!! Yet again more lies!! I gave my story to the Sunday world!! Belfast telegraph an the rest off the papers r getting there own two pees worth! Lies sell rem[/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueI can not see ur posts!! Believe what ever u want!![/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueThere have been hundreds off reports in what gybed think happened! All I which have different side'.[/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueI never received a penny from giving my story my story was to put an end to the daily torture from media back home!![/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueThe only contact I've had with them was in wed past! Buh every paper has contacted me one way or another looking my story[/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueI did not receive a penny nor did I want a penny! I did it for my daughter so she can see when she's older that u defended myself an her father!! I done it so she can see that I didn't alow all the media to just print what they want about our family![/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueThere was no swimming pool incident never mind two!! U people need to read between the lines! I've nothing further to say! No u don't have the money off the mccanns!![/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

[size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12][size=12]Lee-Anne Moreland O'DonoghueNo I don't agree that the police where just acting outta concern! They seen a chance to tear us to streads an they did so!! The police in Portugal r brutal! They beat me an my partner because we wants to see our daughter!! They r horrible[/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

I lived in Majorca for thirty years and was an interpreter for the violence court there. I have translated many declarations between violent drunken tourists and Spanish police. I would say that the bruising shown on those photos are the result of rough restraint when the police tried to cuff him. I do not know about Portugal, but in Spain all police carry guns, even the local police. It would have been shocking if they had entered with guns in their hand, but I am assuming they were in their holsters.Police in Spain have no tolerance for disruptive drunken tourists, and as they can get quite aggressive the police cuff them as soon as possible and as roughly as need be.

Natalie Charlesworth Lee-Ann I don't want you to take this the wrong way but if you're trying to move on why the interviews with the papers?Lee-Anne Moreland O'Donoghue Because I thought if I gave the truth they would stop hounding me as we have been hounded for our story from we came homeLee-Anne Moreland O'Donoghue Not money!! My version.. Every paper in portual an Northern Ireland has had there say!!! So I'm not alowd to tell the truth y while family has been slated in the pressLee-Anne Moreland O'Donoghue I can't see any pool from my eighth floor view if room? Also I can't see where any onlookers would be to apparently see me so drunk!!!Lee-Anne Moreland O'Donoghue That's because there where no onlookers that's because I never threw my child in a pool!!! That's because it's all lies!! End off!! Believe what uses wantLee-Anne Moreland O'Donoghue There was no swimming pool incident never mind two!! U people need to read between the lines! I've nothing further to say! No u don't have the money off the mccanns!!

This is obviously her version of the truth. The photos showing a car park are deliberately misleading, no one accused her of throwing the baby into the pool from the balcony. 1) Throwing the child in the pool (from the poolside) 2) staggering around on the balcony while holding the child, are two entirely separate incidents. She's cunningly twisted the truth by merging them into one, to give the impression the allegations are false.

@tasprin wrote:This is obviously her version of the truth. The photos showing a car park are deliberately misleading, no one accused her of throwing the baby into the pool from the balcony. 1) Throwing the child in the pool (from the poolside) 2) staggering around on the balcony while holding the child, are two entirely separate incidents. She's cunningly twisted the truth by merging them into one, to give the impression the allegations are false.

To be fair that is what l read in one report.

I saw that thread on FB quickly before it was deleted, she never answered why the police were called in the first place.

@tasprin wrote:This is obviously her version of the truth. The photos showing a car park are deliberately misleading, no one accused her of throwing the baby into the pool from the balcony. 1) Throwing the child in the pool (from the poolside) 2) staggering around on the balcony while holding the child, are two entirely separate incidents. She's cunningly twisted the truth by merging them into one, to give the impression the allegations are false.

To be fair that is what l read in one report.

I saw that thread on FB quickly before it was deleted, she never answered why the police were called in the first place.

The press have probably got that story from her. When I first heard the story it was two separate events...Throwing the baby in the pool AND staggering about on her balcony, drunk, with the baby

Yes, I think that she (even with the limited amount of intelligence she seems to possess) has maybe realised that people have read the original accounts and know fine well that no one accused her of throwing the baby into the pool from the 8th floor, and that there were different reasons that the police were called, other than giving the baby some calpol...So hopefully she'll stop digging an even bigger hole for herself now..but then again..

Lee-Anne Moreland O'Donoghue I can't see any pool from my eighth floor view if room? Also I can't see where any onlookers would be to apparently see me so drunk!!!

Lee-Anne Moreland O'Donoghue That's because there where no onlookers that's because I never threw my child in a pool!!! That's because it's all lies!! End off!! Believe what uses want!

Oh dear,oh dear.

Three is the liars number (Mark McLish). When someone is deceptive be it a faked attack, number or criminals who robbed them or they are making up a time, it is invariably the number three that crops up, the exception is usually when someone is pulled over for DUI where they claim they only had a couple.I am not buying the three drinks claim.She doesn't tell us what those drinks were either, it could have been three pints of vodka.

Next she tells us she can't see any pool from her window nor can she see where any onlookers would be to see her apparantly so drunk.The onlookers could have been anywhere, they wouldn't have to be standing directly underneath their balconey to have seen her.

She doesn't tell us she can't see where any onlookers would be to see her apparently so drunk!!!She tells us instead where any onlookers would be to apparently see me so drunk!!!A big difference, one sees her as apparantly drunk and the other is where the onlookers would apprantly be

She also doesn't tell us she was drunk, she tells us she was so drunk indicating severe inebriation

That's because there where no onlookers that's because I never threw my child in a pool!!! That's because it's all lies!! End off!! Believe what uses want

Because is used to explain why something happened/didn't happenHere we see it repeated three times, , a cluster of blues making this sentence extremeely sensitive.Anything in the negative is sensitive.Order is also important.Here we have no onlookers, followed by not throwing her child in the pool, followed by it's all lies.Never does not mean did not.She doesn't tell us she did not throw her child in a pool and if she can't say it, i can't say it for her.Fot there to be a THAT there has to be a THIS.She tells us what she allegedly didn't do rather than tell us what she did do.

ow does she know there were no onlookers?Did she look out for them before doing whatever she did?dDd she not see them due to her state of inebriation?

When someone uses the phrase, that's all i know, it's all i remember, end off or similar, it tells us they want to end to topic being discussed, they wnat to talk about something/anything else because the topic is sensitive to them>This is a phrase often used by guilty people when they want to stop the topic of discussion.

Her own words tell me she was drunk and was thus her child was at risk of harm.

hotel residents would npt have reported them if they had been sober and not placing they child in harm's way, they would not have reported her if they had seen her giving her child a medicine, they would have assumed perhaps she was feeling poorly.The residents would not have called hotel management and then hotel management would not have called the police if the parents had been sober and behaving responsibly towards their daughter.It would have been clear to the residents, the hotel management and the police that they were drunk.Their child would not have been removed from their care if they had been sober, nor would she have been examined in hospital.

Police have got far better things to do then go arresting sober, responsible parents looking after their child just because the hotel manage and a few hotel guests say so.The police would have seen the condition of the parents and done exactly as they should which is take the child into protective custody and have it checked out for any injuries.

What would they be saying if the police hadn't been called, if the guests and management ignored their drunken behavior and their child ended up dead from either drowning in the pool, being dropped over the balcony or any number of other reasons due to it's parents being completely rat arsed.

Would they be blaming the police etc for not doing anything when they saw the parents so drunk?

Would they be doing a mccann and blaming the police for letting them get ratarsed and thus hurting/killing their child?

Would it be everyone elses fault for letting them get so drunk in the first place, they should have stopped serving them alcohol etc?

The new defence for drunk or abusive parents is the mccann defence, we have been advised we were withing the realms of responsible parenting, why are we being prosecuted when we didn't lose a child, our children weren't injured in any way etc, we just got drunk and the mccanns who admitted leaving their children home alone ever night in an unlocked apartment whilst they got smashed,( we know the children were being babysat by the missing adult each night but just for the sake of the story) managed to lose a child and got millions in donations, lots of sympathy and free trips around the world.

____________________The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.

@Hobs wrote:.......I am not buying the three drinks claim.She doesn't tell us what those drinks were either, it could have been three pints of vodka.

She says it was cocktails, ie. by definition a mixture of two or more drinks, so she easily could have had the equivelent of 6 - 12 regular shots, put that together with the fact that many people would downplay the number of drinks they might have if asked about it....

Report (from 6.50) on Portuguese TV. Please could someone help with a translation?

The hotel manager says the mother was the one who called reception for help, accusing the father of taking the child. He found the father at the bar with the child in his hands, and nappies on the floor.They went up to the room and argued and placed the child in the inflatable swimming pool (child inflatable small).They argued about who was stupid and drunk.